Template:Did you know nominations/Sitriuc mac Ímair


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Fuebaey (talk) 14:23, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Sitriuc mac Ímair

 * ... that Sitriuc mac Ímair was the third son of Ímar to reign as King of Dublin?
 * Reviewed: The National (Scotland)

Created by Retroplum (talk). Self nominated at 22:41, 26 November 2014 (UTC).


 * Symbol confirmed.svg Article long enough (1,700 prose ch.), created 26.11.14, well-cited and based on excellent sources, without obvious grammar issues, NPOV, close paraphrasing of the sources etc. Hook is short enough, interesting and factually verified by me based on an external source. Did slight copy-editing to the hook to make it grammatically correct and eligible. Good job on the article. AddMore (talk) 11:21, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg The article does not seem complete; it reads like a bio entry in some encyclopedia (not Wikipedia). I think that additional sources would help. Yoninah (talk) 22:38, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Realistically, everything we know about the individual is on the page (as far as I know at least), such is the paucity of the historical record. The only records we have dating from the time period of his life that mention him are the Irish annals, and they only mention a dozen or so events per year, typically battles and deaths of famous individuals. I could try and find other sources that mention him, but all primary sources are already included, and any additional ones would be secondary sources discussing the same few entries in the annals. Retroplum (talk) 23:22, 27 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg Agree, restoring tick. 'Not seeming complete' shouldn't hold up a DYK, last I knew. Article is still good per Addmore. —Akrabbimtalk 18:08, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
 * please read Rule D7. If there are no other records, then we should run with what we have, but "not seeming complete" is indeed a reason for holding up a DYK. Yoninah (talk) 23:44, 22 December 2014 (UTC)